Anyone thinking this is a bench-mark show should reconsider. Still not sure if there is any "art" in there, or just a first showing by a new Rooms administration showing us that "famous-types" will come.

that is rightit was a book launch and an attempt to show us that famous types will come.but can we get any famous types that are actually famous for visual art? If someone tells me that coupland is well known for his visual art practice i will crap myself. was it meant to be an interactive piece of work with all that tissue? was i meant to use it after i read text selections from his book? just curious....honestly i really am... please help me out cause i am confused. this is not sarcasm.

I think it is fantastic that Shawna or Gordon or whoever booked this show. While I don't personally think it is the most interesting show, in fact I found the work on the artists behalf a bit lazy and unengaging.-I applaud the curators for bringing in different work from big names. He is a BIG name. Thats what we need. He'll go away and tell all his big name friends about his experiences here and the facilities and they will come too. It puts the newfoundland art scene on the map. What? You don't want that? Janet Cardiff is next. Christopher Pratt, There was talk of Brian Jungen. This is all fantastic. How small minded do you have to be to slag "administration" ie curator for exposing us to different stuff. The article last weekend by blah blah blah on the front page of the independant was typical reaction and attitude one might expect around here to exposure to this type of work. that kind of kneejerk reation makes me want to puke. The interviewer makes assumptions about " torontoish"copeland in the '''''''torontoish Rooms". inferiority complexes rule around these parts. Only halfway through the interview does she seem to realize how fucking intelligent this man is. He is extremely accomplished. We should welcome people like this. in the broader picture it benefits us all, regardless of your take on the show Don't worry there is plenty of opportunity for local artists to exhibit at the Rooms if that is what people are worried about

I do agree that he took advantage of the situation to perhaps market his latest book jpod. There was a big table selling his books. But then again all of his creative work is so intertwined. Perhaps you would do the same.

to call the rooms torontoish is so ignorant i can't believe it. who said that and in what paper? that is absolutely moronic. Definately a lack education i'm sure. Do people expect one to pay for an art education, return here and then create some form of folk art?

I just find the whole "Toronto-ish" criticism really dismally boring. Like, what the fuck, we have a 50 million dollar facility and we're supposed to show, what? my grandmother's watercolours? (which incidentally, would be kinda cool). Whoever mentioned the inferiority complex was right on the mark. I've thought for awhile that NL feels about Canada the way Canadians feel about the US. It's contadictory, childish and totally fucked up. And I still haven't gotten down to see the show.

Good for Noreen Golfman for nailing the author of the ":toronto-ish" article to the wall. Noreens views are in todays independant. Masy 28.I have to reneg a bit on the .Copeland show. I dont think lazy is the correct way to describe the show. Clearly a lot of technical work was involved installing the show. Kudos to the crew at the Rooms. I feel he is such a busy person that, while I found the ideas behind the work profound in ways, there could have been more effort put into certain pieces. A bit slap dash. Jusy easy I guess. Like the spam cans. And while the paper pile piece is clear in concept it is rather uninteresting to look at.

So Susan Rendell wrote the "Toronto-ish" thing? I'm surprised. I think she is generally brilliant but in this case I guess we disagree. As for Noreen Golfman,I do know that a lot of MUN profs were real keen to hang out with Coupland... from what I've heard the after party required a PhD at the door. I saw Michael Crummey at the Grapevine after the opening and thought: Wow, even HE didn't get invited. Must be some party.

what about the Goodies?who the heck eats those things?penny gumballs? cheese and crackers? I wish they would get some good food like steak sandwiches, or hot food of some sort, chicken wings or shrimp, i love that stuff. I really like sushi- not every kind but some. but i can eat it. i could fill up on that stuff for sure. as for the candy, it should have been sour gummy worms, gummy bears, swedish fish, those raspberry things, really anything along those lines would have been better. I don't like rockets and crap like that. chocolate bars if you can ever afford them. Please get those bags of little ones.Anyways this is alot to ask but for future shows - this is a little recommendation - that i feel might improve things a little.

As far as I'm concerned, the Coupland show wasn't half bad. I liked being able to do my own 'cut-up' by glancing back and forth and choosing sentences on the walls at random. I also got a kick out of the 'ramps' of paper towels, paper, and toilet paper.

That's not to say I don't have any gripes about the show... it surely didn't need that much space. It could have done just as well with a third or half of the space it got. And what's with the full-wall stickers of text? When you get close enough, you can see an awful blurry edge. This is the Rooms, surely they can afford the cut vinyl text and a patient technician...

The best part of this show, for me, was having to go through Janet Cardiff's installation room first to get to it...After nearly having my heart broken by the sheer gorgeousness of sound in her piece it was quite the rude awakening to find myself in run-on sentence land in the next room...some kids came in while I was there and started playing with the rolls of paper towels, thumping them, rolling them on the pile...although this wasn't allowed and they got kicked out right away it was interesting to see them interact with no reverence at all - not caring who Coupland is or why he left all his household paper in the gallery...

That's fantastic to read! I love seeing examples of interaction like that. I'm sure Coupland would actually be quite interested in finding out about stuff like that. If nothing else, it reminds us that those objects (no matter how reverentially displayed on plinths) still largely resound and everyday objects. Just like Duchamp's Fountain, it's interesting to see both sides of the interpretation... ordinary, not-so-ordinary...

why should there be any reverence? esp for something so lackluster, ordinary and common place. Not the toilet paper but the show and concept. Must everything in a gallery be revered? Can anyone honestly claim to be in awe of this text and toilet paper display? Most gallery shows are highfalutin and i wish they had of wiped their asses with his concept. Most artists and patrons of the arts want to be high culture, high class, high whatever. Most just want to be revered and it shows in the work they create.